But also this would mean that the rhs of in_domain of s::G is no longer unique (is the graph that represents the in_domain relation supposed to be acyclic or not?). Is this desired behavior? If so, is the behavior documented somewhere? E.g. in http://vcc.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=Sequential
Domains

in_domain(p,q) is written as p \in \domain(q) in the new syntax, which is also more intuitive way of thinking about it (there is still some special triggering involved, which I guess I need to fix one day...)

We just do not provide a way to reason about \domain(x) when x is not wrapped, because you would anyhow lose any information about it after any function call or atomic block. There is no soundness reason for that,
just utility.